Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Undefined discussion subject.

167891012»

Comments

  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935
    Seen on Reddit -- https://i.redd.it/uxt46ed68am41.jpg

    Perhaps that's why the Italians are so buggered.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,838

    RobD said:

    I think this analogy sums up the government's (change of) strategy.

    Think of covid-19 as an airplane in the sky that has non working landing gear, the crew try and do a safe landing by fixing the problem but that's not going to happen so the crew have decided to fly a bit more to burn off more fuel whilst telling the passengers to adopt the brace position.

    For the general population I can see some logic in that, but for the old, I just don't understand why rather than saying don't go on that Med cruise, don't f##king go out unless you have to...and don't go visit your Granny in the care home as you probably kill them.
    Because they'll have to be telling them that for weeks on end.
    And....I genuinely think otherwise fit and healthy oldies in their 60/70s can stay inside for the next 3 months and get home deliveries.
    Plenty in their 60s and 70s who still have to work to pay the bills. PBers tend to be on the fortunate side of life, fortunately!
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    Apparently Macron just spoke to the nation, that's the first time he has done so on this crisis. I find that Macron and Merkel really haven't spoken much quite astonishing.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,373

    Endillion said:

    IanB2 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I notice that Canada is reporting only 3.2 infected people per million population compared with the USA's 4.8:

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

    Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?

    Or that Canada is also under detecting ?

    The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.

    The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.

    The two disadvantages are
    (1) Late recognition of the issue
    (2) Poor public health infrastructure

    (Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
    I don't buy the population density point.

    Overall population density is low in the US bacause there are vast areas of empty landscape but urbanisation levels (at 82.3%) are similar to the UK (83.4%) and higher than France (80.4%), Spain (80.3%), Germany (77.3%), and... Italy (70.4%).
    And if I walk five minutes down the shops and the American drives half an hour to the mall, if we both spend half an hour shopping, our net risks of picking up the virus are likely to be similar.

    Plus many Americans have this weird habit of driving from all over to a small building and standing next to each other for an hour or two every Sunday. Virus heaven.
    However, Billy Bob who lives off-grid in rural Montana is probably going to be ok.
    Except Billy-Bob doesn't believe in washing his hands much, or ever.
    Yes, but he never talks to anybody.
    True, the off-grid tend to be both materially and socially self-sufficient as well.

    There's a significant minority of Americans who live for an event like this, with this apocalypticism shot right through their cinema and popular mythology.

    In many American blockbusters, things are only genuine when there's a national crisis. This is the flip-side of America's, potentially, catastrophically ill-prepared and undernourished public and social infrastructure.
    The actual number of really self sufficient people is tiny. A bunch of guns, a semi-rural location and a stack of MREs in your garage doesn't make it so.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    Macron called on those aged over 70 and with underlying health conditions to limit their contact with the outside world and remain at home as much as possible.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,153
    edited March 2020

    IanB2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Am I wrong in thinking that we’ve effectively surrendered to this ?

    Has Downing St. gamed this and decided the economy comes first, and it’s better to get it out if the way as quickly as possible ?
    And the excess deaths are a price to be paid ?

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/12/coronavirus-as-many-as-10000-in-britain-may-already-have-it-says-pm
    Medical, scientific and public health experts criticised the steps outlined to tackle what the prime minister described as the “worst public health crisis for a generation”, including ending school trips abroad, stopping older and vulnerable people taking cruises and the use of self-isolation for a temperature and cough lasting four hours.

    Schools are to remain open and large gatherings such as sports events and concerts will go ahead, amid concerns that moving too soon with stricter measures could bring public fatigue, though the prime minister said both measures remained under consideration....

    ...“I can’t see that any of these measures are going to have a big impact … none of that is really going to affect transmission in the UK,” said Paul Hunter, professor of medicine at the university of East Anglia.

    Prof John Ashton, former regional director of public health for northwest England, said: “This is a kind of ragbag with no particular logic to it … they are issuing some semi-directive things but they are not really doing what we need to do, which is to mobilise and encourage communities, neighbourhoods, families to form their own plans for the next period in which the local situation will influence what happens – whether it’s not going out to eat, or stopping sporting events.”...


    I need to think around this, but it’s quite clear that, for now at least, there is no intention to keep the number of infections as small as possible.

    The list of expendable is going to be a sizeable one. Some of us here.

    Weren’t you listening to the CMO? We want and need more infections.
    I am afraid there are a few people - and this is not broken down by party lines or Brexit lines at all - who simply refuse to try to understand the basic scientific reasoning behind these decisions because they have their own axes to grind or (more understandably) because they are frightened of facing reality.
    Agreed. There are also a few who seem unable to understand, try as they might. It's science after all, so a complete mystery to some.
    I wonder at what point the hatred will turn on Chris Whitty and Patrick Vallance..
    Next week, or the week after, as things start to ramp up more seriously and panic starts to take hold more generally.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,720
    IanB2 said:

    So 10% off the DJ, now at 21,200 and 10.9% off the FTSE100, now at 5,237.

    How far will they fall over the coming weeks, I wonder?

    I was thinking DJ at 20,000 is a buy... but now I am not so sure.

    2013 to 2015, the Dow tracked about 18000. That looks like a credible bottom to me.

    But it depends on when, and how, the true crisis in America hits the news.
    I started buying again, late afternoon today. I think quite a lot of bargains about. Always tricky catching a falling knife, but I think there will be a shake out over the weekend and further drop on Monday. We may well then be close to the bottom.

    It provides some amusement, while awaiting our PPE, but I can't take it with me.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,288
    Another trajectory chart, the form of which shows s bit more the differences between Western approaches thus far:

    https://twitter.com/EGA65/status/1238066861243117569?s=09

  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935

    Apparently Macron just spoke to the nation, that's the first time he has done so on this crisis. I find that Macron and Merkel really haven't spoken much quite astonishing.

    Quite different from HMG, certainly.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,570
    tyson said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.

    What is the reason for this?

    I believe it is because of the change of status from contain to delay. From what was said today the belief is that large scale testing semi random testing once the virus is wild serves little purpose and they are better off identifying the virus in patients arriving at hospital displaying symptoms. I assume for one thing this allows them to provide a better level of protection for front line health workers.

    Your faith in Boris Johnson's Govt is really quite endearing....takes me back when I left my tooth under the pillow for the tooth fairy
    I have no faith in the Government - any Government. But I do have some faith in the abilities of the experts who are advising the Government and whose advise they appear to be following. Certainly a lot more faith in them than in random commentators who appear to lack both the expertise and the information to make any sort of qualified assessment of the best way forward.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    edited March 2020

    RobD said:

    I think this analogy sums up the government's (change of) strategy.

    Think of covid-19 as an airplane in the sky that has non working landing gear, the crew try and do a safe landing by fixing the problem but that's not going to happen so the crew have decided to fly a bit more to burn off more fuel whilst telling the passengers to adopt the brace position.

    For the general population I can see some logic in that, but for the old, I just don't understand why rather than saying don't go on that Med cruise, don't f##king go out unless you have to...and don't go visit your Granny in the care home as you probably kill them.
    Because they'll have to be telling them that for weeks on end.
    And....I genuinely think otherwise fit and healthy oldies in their 60/70s can stay inside for the next 3 months and get home deliveries.
    Plenty in their 60s and 70s who still have to work to pay the bills. PBers tend to be on the fortunate side of life, fortunately!
    Government could provide an economic guarantee to ensure they don't do so.

    Not only are we sending lots of not that ancient people to their deaths, we will also clog up the system. I honestly don't get this part of the plan.

    Sure, I can comprehend not closing schools and that most people in 20/30/40s going to be fine, and so the thought being get herd immunity.

    But 60+ and you are in danger zone.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,838

    IanB2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Am I wrong in thinking that we’ve effectively surrendered to this ?

    Has Downing St. gamed this and decided the economy comes first, and it’s better to get it out if the way as quickly as possible ?
    And the excess deaths are a price to be paid ?

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/12/coronavirus-as-many-as-10000-in-britain-may-already-have-it-says-pm
    Medical, scientific and public health experts criticised the steps outlined to tackle what the prime minister described as the “worst public health crisis for a generation”, including ending school trips abroad, stopping older and vulnerable people taking cruises and the use of self-isolation for a temperature and cough lasting four hours.

    Schools are to remain open and large gatherings such as sports events and concerts will go ahead, amid concerns that moving too soon with stricter measures could bring public fatigue, though the prime minister said both measures remained under consideration....

    ...“I can’t see that any of these measures are going to have a big impact … none of that is really going to affect transmission in the UK,” said Paul Hunter, professor of medicine at the university of East Anglia.

    Prof John Ashton, former regional director of public health for northwest England, said: “This is a kind of ragbag with no particular logic to it … they are issuing some semi-directive things but they are not really doing what we need to do, which is to mobilise and encourage communities, neighbourhoods, families to form their own plans for the next period in which the local situation will influence what happens – whether it’s not going out to eat, or stopping sporting events.”...


    I need to think around this, but it’s quite clear that, for now at least, there is no intention to keep the number of infections as small as possible.

    The list of expendable is going to be a sizeable one. Some of us here.

    Weren’t you listening to the CMO? We want and need more infections.
    I am afraid there are a few people - and this is not broken down by party lines or Brexit lines at all - who simply refuse to try to understand the basic scientific reasoning behind these decisions because they have their own axes to grind or (more understandably) because they are frightened of facing reality.
    Agreed. There are also a few who seem unable to understand, try as they might. It's science after all, so a complete mystery to some.
    I think it is an interesting mix -

    1) anti-Tories who find the idea that the government is really following the advice of the CMO and CSO.... its the wrong narrative. So they are inventing their own - mainly around behavioural science.

    2) "Common sense" types who can't understand why their brilliant ideas are not being followed.

    3) "Herders" - we need to do whatever other countries do. Lots of that.

    For all three types avoidance of what the actual CMO and actual CSO are actually saying is... endemic. They literally don't want to understand.

    I wonder at what point the hatred will turn on Chris Whitty and Patrick Vallance..
    Please can we add the people who can do a little bit of maths so think their models are really interesting.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    RobD said:

    Seen on Reddit -- https://i.redd.it/uxt46ed68am41.jpg

    Perhaps that's why the Italians are so buggered.

    Dirty Dutch
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,167
    edited March 2020

    Endillion said:

    IanB2 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I notice that Canada is reporting only 3.2 infected people per million population compared with the USA's 4.8:

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

    Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?

    Or that Canada is also under detecting ?

    The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.

    The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.

    The two disadvantages are
    (1) Late recognition of the issue
    (2) Poor public health infrastructure

    (Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
    I don't buy the population density point.

    Overall population density is low in the US bacause there are vast areas of empty landscape but urbanisation levels (at 82.3%) are similar to the UK (83.4%) and higher than France (80.4%), Spain (80.3%), Germany (77.3%), and... Italy (70.4%).
    And if I walk five minutes down the shops and the American drives half an hour to the mall, if we both spend half an hour shopping, our net risks of picking up the virus are likely to be similar.

    Plus many Americans have this weird habit of driving from all over to a small building and standing next to each other for an hour or two every Sunday. Virus heaven.
    However, Billy Bob who lives off-grid in rural Montana is probably going to be ok.
    Except Billy-Bob doesn't believe in washing his hands much, or ever.
    Yes, but he never talks to anybody.
    True, the off-grid tend to be both materially and socially self-sufficient as well.

    There's a significant minority of Americans who live for an event like this, with this apocalypticism shot right through their cinema and popular mythology.

    In many American blockbusters, things are only genuine when there's a national crisis. This is the flip-side of America's, potentially, catastrophically ill-prepared and undernourished public and social infrastructure.
    The actual number of really self sufficient people is tiny. A bunch of guns, a semi-rural location and a stack of MREs in your garage doesn't make it so.
    Possibly materially that's true, but more generally the place of self-sufficiency, in an era-defining crisis, in american culture is very large and prized, almost definitive.

    In their collective memory and unconscious, as Jung might say, Americans have found the promised land but still seem to expect some sort of defining test that precedes government or civilisation.
  • maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,590
    F1 appears to be squaring the circle but letting fans in, running a full weekend without F1. So all the downsides, none of the upsides, but no refunds so none of the decision makers lose money. Great!
  • CatManCatMan Posts: 3,060
    https://twitter.com/f1broadcasting/status/1238218640656392193?s=20

    Glad I pay for my Sky Sports subscription monthly
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,037
    The experts are giving the best advice to achieve the objectives they are aiming for.

    Unfortunately minimizing the chance of me catching it doesn't appear to be their objective, so I'll make my own choices.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,695

    Toilet paper not an issue in Waitrose tonight.

    Went in at 7pm and they had still about 50% stock on the shelves with three hours to go until close.

    But, lots of shelf stacking staff (looked like they'd mobilised more than usual) and both staff and customers looked nervous.

    Did you buy any ?
    Yeah. One pack.
    Made casual enquiry re our toilet roll stock of Mrs P. this afternoon and she confessed that she has two 16-packs hidden away in a cupboard which she bought last year ahead of a potential no-deal Brexit crash (remember those days?).

    Considered advertising them on ebay but uneasy at the thought of profiteering from the current crisis.

    (No such qualms re buying back into equities at the right point though.)
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,609
    maaarsh said:

    F1 appears to be squaring the circle but letting fans in, running a full weekend without F1. So all the downsides, none of the upsides, but no refunds so none of the decision makers lose money. Great!

    Maybe they'll let the punters have a go in a car.....
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    edited March 2020

    Endillion said:

    IanB2 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I notice that Canada is reporting only 3.2 infected people per million population compared with the USA's 4.8:

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

    Doesn't that suggest the USA might not have the huge undetected numbers claimed ?

    Or that Canada is also under detecting ?

    The US has one big advantage, and two big disadvantages.

    The big advantage it has is really low population density. Simply, the average Brit is going to come across far more people each day on average than an American. Large chunks of America - largely rural areas - may well get by completely unscathed.

    The two disadvantages are
    (1) Late recognition of the issue
    (2) Poor public health infrastructure

    (Plus you might add few social safety nets.)
    I don't buy the population density point.

    Overall population density is low in the US bacause there are vast areas of empty landscape but urbanisation levels (at 82.3%) are similar to the UK (83.4%) and higher than France (80.4%), Spain (80.3%), Germany (77.3%), and... Italy (70.4%).
    And if I walk five minutes down the shops and the American drives half an hour to the mall, if we both spend half an hour shopping, our net risks of picking up the virus are likely to be similar.

    Plus many Americans have this weird habit of driving from all over to a small building and standing next to each other for an hour or two every Sunday. Virus heaven.
    However, Billy Bob who lives off-grid in rural Montana is probably going to be ok.
    Except Billy-Bob doesn't believe in washing his hands much, or ever.
    Yes, but he never talks to anybody.
    True, the off-grid tend to be both materially and socially self-sufficient as well.

    There's a significant minority of Americans who live for an event like this, with this apocalypticism shot right through their cinema and popular mythology.

    In many American blockbusters, things are only genuine when there's a national crisis. This is the flip-side of America's, potentially, catastrophically ill-prepared and undernourished public and social infrastructure.
    The actual number of really self sufficient people is tiny. A bunch of guns, a semi-rural location and a stack of MREs in your garage doesn't make it so.
    Possibly materially that's true, but more generally the place of self-sufficiency in an era-defining crisis in american culture is very prized and large, almost definitive.

    In their national consciousness, Americans have found the promised land but still seem to expect some sort of defining test that precedes government or civilisation.
    If you go to places like Montana there are significant numbers of people out there that can survive without having to interact with the outside world, and they are not all crazy preppers. People who by the fact they live along way from what the only (what) 2 big towns in Montana, already have an element of self sufficiency with a small holding, have to buy large amount of stock because it is 200 mile round trip to do a big shop etc.
  • ParistondaParistonda Posts: 1,843

    Macron called on those aged over 70 and with underlying health conditions to limit their contact with the outside world and remain at home as much as possible.

    Yes and he's announced a whole swathe of measures, (schools closing, businesses must offer homeworking where available, avoid any unnecessary travel etc) - a soft quarantine, no big lockdown yet but I think that will come once the idea of quarantine is better accepted by the french, it really seems that all the french people i know remain completely unconcerned. He also announced a bunch of economic measures to try and ride out that aspect (partial unemployment benefits for those that must stop work, deferring taxes for March for all businesses). It was a good strong address from his part, lets hope it helps slow down the crisis.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,838

    RobD said:

    I think this analogy sums up the government's (change of) strategy.

    Think of covid-19 as an airplane in the sky that has non working landing gear, the crew try and do a safe landing by fixing the problem but that's not going to happen so the crew have decided to fly a bit more to burn off more fuel whilst telling the passengers to adopt the brace position.

    For the general population I can see some logic in that, but for the old, I just don't understand why rather than saying don't go on that Med cruise, don't f##king go out unless you have to...and don't go visit your Granny in the care home as you probably kill them.
    Because they'll have to be telling them that for weeks on end.
    And....I genuinely think otherwise fit and healthy oldies in their 60/70s can stay inside for the next 3 months and get home deliveries.
    Plenty in their 60s and 70s who still have to work to pay the bills. PBers tend to be on the fortunate side of life, fortunately!
    Government could provide an economic guarantee to ensure they don't do so.

    All in favour. When the restrictions start 1k each for every adult, an additional 1k for the over 60s and see where we are again after a month or two. Helicopter money is a good part of the economic solution here imo. (This is as someone who strongly thinks there needs to be economic rebalancing between the generations - but that can wait).
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    edited March 2020

    Toilet paper not an issue in Waitrose tonight.

    Went in at 7pm and they had still about 50% stock on the shelves with three hours to go until close.

    But, lots of shelf stacking staff (looked like they'd mobilised more than usual) and both staff and customers looked nervous.

    Did you buy any ?
    Yeah. One pack.
    Made casual enquiry re our toilet roll stock of Mrs P. this afternoon and she confessed that she has two 16-packs hidden away in a cupboard which she bought last year ahead of a potential no-deal Brexit crash (remember those days?).

    Considered advertising them on ebay but uneasy at the thought of profiteering from the current crisis.

    (No such qualms re buying back into equities at the right point though.)
    Mrs P is an amateur....Mrs U have bloody 100s of the damn things stored all over the place, no from panic buying as such, more carried away at the CostCo when some offer was on.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    Satellite images show Iran has built mass graves amid coronavirus outbreak

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/12/coronavirus-iran-mass-graves-qom
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,622
    eadric said:

    Toilet paper not an issue in Waitrose tonight.

    Went in at 7pm and they had still about 50% stock on the shelves with three hours to go until close.

    But, lots of shelf stacking staff (looked like they'd mobilised more than usual) and both staff and customers looked nervous.

    A very large central London Sainsbury's was, this evening, all out of rice, pasta, many tinned goods, lots of cleaning products, and - oddly - almost all salt.
    My theory is that people living in London have less storage spaces because of the high cost of housing and so have a much lower regular store of such items.

    Also people in inner urban areas probably eat out more in normal circumstances and so have less food at home.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,695
    eadric said:

    Toilet paper not an issue in Waitrose tonight.

    Went in at 7pm and they had still about 50% stock on the shelves with three hours to go until close.

    But, lots of shelf stacking staff (looked like they'd mobilised more than usual) and both staff and customers looked nervous.

    A very large central London Sainsbury's was, this evening, all out of rice, pasta, many tinned goods, lots of cleaning products, and - oddly - almost all salt.
    Good grief man! What are you doing in a supermarket in central London? Don't you know there's a plague on?

    Get out to that bolt-hole in deepest Wales, or wherever it was, before it's too late.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,695

    eadric said:

    Toilet paper not an issue in Waitrose tonight.

    Went in at 7pm and they had still about 50% stock on the shelves with three hours to go until close.

    But, lots of shelf stacking staff (looked like they'd mobilised more than usual) and both staff and customers looked nervous.

    A very large central London Sainsbury's was, this evening, all out of rice, pasta, many tinned goods, lots of cleaning products, and - oddly - almost all salt.
    My theory is that people living in London have less storage spaces because of the high cost of housing and so have a much lower regular store of such items.

    Also people in inner urban areas probably eat out more in normal circumstances and so have less food at home.
    Where are they storing all the stuff they are panic buying then?
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,208

    Apparently Macron just spoke to the nation, that's the first time he has done so on this crisis. I find that Macron and Merkel really haven't spoken much quite astonishing.

    As far as I recall Johnson has only spoken twice: today and last Tuesday
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    EasyJet are waiving the fee they normally charge when customers want to change their flights
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,720

    The experts are giving the best advice to achieve the objectives they are aiming for.

    Unfortunately minimizing the chance of me catching it doesn't appear to be their objective, so I'll make my own choices.

    There seems to be the idea that COVID19 will become endemic, and around for years, so need to build up herd immunity. That may not be the case. Neither SARDS nor MERS did.

    It also is a pessimistic view that there will be neither a pharmaceutical nor immunisation that is effective, so we need a bit of Darwinism.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited March 2020
    Tasty vegan option in Aldi, and healthy too. A lot of these foods are high in salt.


  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    edited March 2020
    I can't quite get my head around just how weird Trump is...watch the video to the end.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8104723/Trump-caught-hot-mic-complaining-ink-stain-shirt-coronavirus-address.html

    It is literally like he has signed off from doing a stint on QVC.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708

    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.

    What is the reason for this?

    That was the strangest thing I heard. They were going for the South Korea model and then today just totally pivoted to the opposite extreme, without explaining any reason why they were no longer interesting in screening the public at large.
    That is another element which nudges me towards my conclusion of surrender to it.
    If you’re just letting rip, what’s the point in ramping up testing ?
    I think the logic is if the infection rate is as high as expected then mass testing is a waste of time.

    It is useful at the start of the pandemic to try and find who has it, and do contact testing for the positive.
    So they think SK approach is a waste of time? Even though they seem to be catching clusters of outbreaks and shutting them down?
    The South Korean approach seems to be working on the assumption that if we contain it then it'll all be fine, but all it needs is a further outbreak later on and they are fecked.
    No, that's not how it works. What they (and Japan etc) are doing is reducing the probability that in any given case, you give it to someone else. If the average sufferer passes it on to less than one person, the number of cases will decline, regardless of how many there are.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,218
    RobD said:

    Seen on Reddit -- https://i.redd.it/uxt46ed68am41.jpg

    Perhaps that's why the Italians are so buggered.

    The Dutch are worse, while the Norwegians never go to the toilet all!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935
    FF43 said:

    Apparently Macron just spoke to the nation, that's the first time he has done so on this crisis. I find that Macron and Merkel really haven't spoken much quite astonishing.

    As far as I recall Johnson has only spoken twice: today and last Tuesday
    \

    I think it's three or four by now. There was one on Monday too, and maybe one more before that.

  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,680
    edited March 2020
    eadric said:

    Toilet paper not an issue in Waitrose tonight.

    Went in at 7pm and they had still about 50% stock on the shelves with three hours to go until close.

    But, lots of shelf stacking staff (looked like they'd mobilised more than usual) and both staff and customers looked nervous.

    A very large central London Sainsbury's was, this evening, all out of rice, pasta, many tinned goods, lots of cleaning products, and - oddly - almost all salt.
    Perhaps we're going all medieval - using it to preserve meat and fish for the long term.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    FF43 said:

    Apparently Macron just spoke to the nation, that's the first time he has done so on this crisis. I find that Macron and Merkel really haven't spoken much quite astonishing.

    As far as I recall Johnson has only spoken twice: today and last Tuesday
    True, but the pandemic is more advanced in France (61 deaths), probably by at least a week.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,601
    edited March 2020
    Fascinating that British experts/scientists seem to have a different view on shutting schools compared to those in other countries (unless politicians are not following scientific advice in those countries).
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    eadric said:

    eadric said:

    Toilet paper not an issue in Waitrose tonight.

    Went in at 7pm and they had still about 50% stock on the shelves with three hours to go until close.

    But, lots of shelf stacking staff (looked like they'd mobilised more than usual) and both staff and customers looked nervous.

    A very large central London Sainsbury's was, this evening, all out of rice, pasta, many tinned goods, lots of cleaning products, and - oddly - almost all salt.
    Good grief man! What are you doing in a supermarket in central London? Don't you know there's a plague on?

    Get out to that bolt-hole in deepest Wales, or wherever it was, before it's too late.
    My wife is now refusing to flee. What can you do.
    Didn't you tell her, "women know your place".
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935

    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.

    What is the reason for this?

    That was the strangest thing I heard. They were going for the South Korea model and then today just totally pivoted to the opposite extreme, without explaining any reason why they were no longer interesting in screening the public at large.
    That is another element which nudges me towards my conclusion of surrender to it.
    If you’re just letting rip, what’s the point in ramping up testing ?
    I think the logic is if the infection rate is as high as expected then mass testing is a waste of time.

    It is useful at the start of the pandemic to try and find who has it, and do contact testing for the positive.
    So they think SK approach is a waste of time? Even though they seem to be catching clusters of outbreaks and shutting them down?
    The South Korean approach seems to be working on the assumption that if we contain it then it'll all be fine, but all it needs is a further outbreak later on and they are fecked.
    No, that's not how it works. What they (and Japan etc) are doing is reducing the probability that in any given case, you give it to someone else. If the average sufferer passes it on to less than one person, the number of cases will decline, regardless of how many there are.
    That's if the methods can be sustained in the long term (months, not weeks).
  • Belgium going to Italy style lockdown, only supermarkets and pharmacies to open.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,695
    eadric said:

    eadric said:

    Toilet paper not an issue in Waitrose tonight.

    Went in at 7pm and they had still about 50% stock on the shelves with three hours to go until close.

    But, lots of shelf stacking staff (looked like they'd mobilised more than usual) and both staff and customers looked nervous.

    A very large central London Sainsbury's was, this evening, all out of rice, pasta, many tinned goods, lots of cleaning products, and - oddly - almost all salt.
    Good grief man! What are you doing in a supermarket in central London? Don't you know there's a plague on?

    Get out to that bolt-hole in deepest Wales, or wherever it was, before it's too late.
    My wife is now refusing to flee. What can you do.
    :lol: Come on - admit it - you wouldn't want to miss all the excitement!
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,205
    edited March 2020
    ok Just seen the advice- turns out it is ... *new coughs* - looks like I'm fine to work, my cough has been low key going since January.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    eadric said:

    eadric said:

    Toilet paper not an issue in Waitrose tonight.

    Went in at 7pm and they had still about 50% stock on the shelves with three hours to go until close.

    But, lots of shelf stacking staff (looked like they'd mobilised more than usual) and both staff and customers looked nervous.

    A very large central London Sainsbury's was, this evening, all out of rice, pasta, many tinned goods, lots of cleaning products, and - oddly - almost all salt.
    Good grief man! What are you doing in a supermarket in central London? Don't you know there's a plague on?

    Get out to that bolt-hole in deepest Wales, or wherever it was, before it's too late.
    My wife is now refusing to flee. What can you do.
    Would you like me to tell her about the joys of Wales & the Welsh ?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935
    Pulpstar said:

    ok Just seen the advice - looks like I'm fine to work, my cough has been low key going since January.

    I think we've found patient zero, folks.

    :D
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,680
    Andy_JS said:

    Fascinating that British experts/scientists seem to have a different view on shutting schools compared to those in other countries (unless politicians are not following scientific advice in those countries).

    Do we have more couples in full-time work here? Sounds like closing schools would create a serious child-care problem for NHS staff.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    RobD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.

    What is the reason for this?

    That was the strangest thing I heard. They were going for the South Korea model and then today just totally pivoted to the opposite extreme, without explaining any reason why they were no longer interesting in screening the public at large.
    That is another element which nudges me towards my conclusion of surrender to it.
    If you’re just letting rip, what’s the point in ramping up testing ?
    I think the logic is if the infection rate is as high as expected then mass testing is a waste of time.

    It is useful at the start of the pandemic to try and find who has it, and do contact testing for the positive.
    So they think SK approach is a waste of time? Even though they seem to be catching clusters of outbreaks and shutting them down?
    The South Korean approach seems to be working on the assumption that if we contain it then it'll all be fine, but all it needs is a further outbreak later on and they are fecked.
    No, that's not how it works. What they (and Japan etc) are doing is reducing the probability that in any given case, you give it to someone else. If the average sufferer passes it on to less than one person, the number of cases will decline, regardless of how many there are.
    That's if the methods can be sustained in the long term (months, not weeks).
    Why wouldn't they be able to be?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,218
    RobD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.

    What is the reason for this?

    That was the strangest thing I heard. They were going for the South Korea model and then today just totally pivoted to the opposite extreme, without explaining any reason why they were no longer interesting in screening the public at large.
    That is another element which nudges me towards my conclusion of surrender to it.
    If you’re just letting rip, what’s the point in ramping up testing ?
    I think the logic is if the infection rate is as high as expected then mass testing is a waste of time.

    It is useful at the start of the pandemic to try and find who has it, and do contact testing for the positive.
    So they think SK approach is a waste of time? Even though they seem to be catching clusters of outbreaks and shutting them down?
    The South Korean approach seems to be working on the assumption that if we contain it then it'll all be fine, but all it needs is a further outbreak later on and they are fecked.
    No, that's not how it works. What they (and Japan etc) are doing is reducing the probability that in any given case, you give it to someone else. If the average sufferer passes it on to less than one person, the number of cases will decline, regardless of how many there are.
    That's if the methods can be sustained in the long term (months, not weeks).
    That's not true.

    Right now, the growth is say 25% more cases per day. So that means on average, each infected person infects someone every four days.

    A two week complete lockdown would mean that three cycles of this are missed (outside transmission in the home), and that a large number of people who were infectious cease being so.

    Of course, when restrictions are relaxed, the number of cases will flare up again. But that's the way this is managed. A series of (say) lockdowns every two months. Unpleasant. But not fatal.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119

    Andy_JS said:

    Fascinating that British experts/scientists seem to have a different view on shutting schools compared to those in other countries (unless politicians are not following scientific advice in those countries).

    Do we have more couples in full-time work here? Sounds like closing schools would create a serious child-care problem for NHS staff.
    I believe that is what the staff bodies have said.
  • RobD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.

    What is the reason for this?

    That was the strangest thing I heard. They were going for the South Korea model and then today just totally pivoted to the opposite extreme, without explaining any reason why they were no longer interesting in screening the public at large.
    That is another element which nudges me towards my conclusion of surrender to it.
    If you’re just letting rip, what’s the point in ramping up testing ?
    I think the logic is if the infection rate is as high as expected then mass testing is a waste of time.

    It is useful at the start of the pandemic to try and find who has it, and do contact testing for the positive.
    So they think SK approach is a waste of time? Even though they seem to be catching clusters of outbreaks and shutting them down?
    The South Korean approach seems to be working on the assumption that if we contain it then it'll all be fine, but all it needs is a further outbreak later on and they are fecked.
    No, that's not how it works. What they (and Japan etc) are doing is reducing the probability that in any given case, you give it to someone else. If the average sufferer passes it on to less than one person, the number of cases will decline, regardless of how many there are.
    That's if the methods can be sustained in the long term (months, not weeks).
    Why wouldn't they be able to be?
    Because covid-19 isn't going away in the near future.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    eadric said:

    I am deeply concerned by British complacency/deeply admiring of British phlegmatism.

    Are we making a tragic error, or have we divined a unique cure? We are alone in this course of action.

    One thing I know for sure, the BBC is talking shit: the News at Ten just categorically said "99% of people that get this will survive".

    This is utter bollocks. The fatality ratio is all over the place. In Wuhan it was nearer 4%. In Italy it's worse than THAT. The global resolved CFR has just gone up to 7%.

    1%?? Fuck off. We just don't know.

    1% max was the CMO’s best estimate this afternoon.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935

    RobD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.

    What is the reason for this?

    That was the strangest thing I heard. They were going for the South Korea model and then today just totally pivoted to the opposite extreme, without explaining any reason why they were no longer interesting in screening the public at large.
    That is another element which nudges me towards my conclusion of surrender to it.
    If you’re just letting rip, what’s the point in ramping up testing ?
    I think the logic is if the infection rate is as high as expected then mass testing is a waste of time.

    It is useful at the start of the pandemic to try and find who has it, and do contact testing for the positive.
    So they think SK approach is a waste of time? Even though they seem to be catching clusters of outbreaks and shutting them down?
    The South Korean approach seems to be working on the assumption that if we contain it then it'll all be fine, but all it needs is a further outbreak later on and they are fecked.
    No, that's not how it works. What they (and Japan etc) are doing is reducing the probability that in any given case, you give it to someone else. If the average sufferer passes it on to less than one person, the number of cases will decline, regardless of how many there are.
    That's if the methods can be sustained in the long term (months, not weeks).
    Why wouldn't they be able to be?
    People's behaviour will undoubtedly change, despite the official advice being the same. How would you feel after being locked down for four or five months?
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,570

    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.

    What is the reason for this?

    That was the strangest thing I heard. They were going for the South Korea model and then today just totally pivoted to the opposite extreme, without explaining any reason why they were no longer interesting in screening the public at large.
    That is another element which nudges me towards my conclusion of surrender to it.
    If you’re just letting rip, what’s the point in ramping up testing ?
    I think the logic is if the infection rate is as high as expected then mass testing is a waste of time.

    It is useful at the start of the pandemic to try and find who has it, and do contact testing for the positive.
    So they think SK approach is a waste of time? Even though they seem to be catching clusters of outbreaks and shutting them down?
    The South Korean approach seems to be working on the assumption that if we contain it then it'll all be fine, but all it needs is a further outbreak later on and they are fecked.
    No, that's not how it works. What they (and Japan etc) are doing is reducing the probability that in any given case, you give it to someone else. If the average sufferer passes it on to less than one person, the number of cases will decline, regardless of how many there are.
    Until they lift the lockdown at which point it all starts again.
  • maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,590
    Anyone else bought a tin of Del Monte Fruit Cocktail? Quite hoping I get locked in now.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    edited March 2020

    eadric said:

    eadric said:

    Toilet paper not an issue in Waitrose tonight.

    Went in at 7pm and they had still about 50% stock on the shelves with three hours to go until close.

    But, lots of shelf stacking staff (looked like they'd mobilised more than usual) and both staff and customers looked nervous.

    A very large central London Sainsbury's was, this evening, all out of rice, pasta, many tinned goods, lots of cleaning products, and - oddly - almost all salt.
    Good grief man! What are you doing in a supermarket in central London? Don't you know there's a plague on?

    Get out to that bolt-hole in deepest Wales, or wherever it was, before it's too late.
    My wife is now refusing to flee. What can you do.
    Would you like me to tell her about the joys of Wales & the Welsh ?
    Given that virus was found on that Hong Kong dog, how can you be sure that your woolly friends aren’t carrying it around?
  • Mikel Arteta has the Coro (via AP).

    Glad we're just soldiering on with a full set of weekend fixtures.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    Andy_JS said:

    Fascinating that British experts/scientists seem to have a different view on shutting schools compared to those in other countries (unless politicians are not following scientific advice in those countries).

    Do we have more couples in full-time work here? Sounds like closing schools would create a serious child-care problem for NHS staff.
    Yes, most likely. Loads of parents forced to stay at home - or dumping the kids at the emergency babysitter, i.e. Granny in most cases.

    That second option might even be more relevant than the first. One theory doing the rounds about the severity of the Italian outbreak is that it's contributed to by the prevalence of multi-generational households.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935
    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.

    What is the reason for this?

    That was the strangest thing I heard. They were going for the South Korea model and then today just totally pivoted to the opposite extreme, without explaining any reason why they were no longer interesting in screening the public at large.
    That is another element which nudges me towards my conclusion of surrender to it.
    If you’re just letting rip, what’s the point in ramping up testing ?
    I think the logic is if the infection rate is as high as expected then mass testing is a waste of time.

    It is useful at the start of the pandemic to try and find who has it, and do contact testing for the positive.
    So they think SK approach is a waste of time? Even though they seem to be catching clusters of outbreaks and shutting them down?
    The South Korean approach seems to be working on the assumption that if we contain it then it'll all be fine, but all it needs is a further outbreak later on and they are fecked.
    No, that's not how it works. What they (and Japan etc) are doing is reducing the probability that in any given case, you give it to someone else. If the average sufferer passes it on to less than one person, the number of cases will decline, regardless of how many there are.
    That's if the methods can be sustained in the long term (months, not weeks).
    That's not true.

    Right now, the growth is say 25% more cases per day. So that means on average, each infected person infects someone every four days.

    A two week complete lockdown would mean that three cycles of this are missed (outside transmission in the home), and that a large number of people who were infectious cease being so.

    Of course, when restrictions are relaxed, the number of cases will flare up again. But that's the way this is managed. A series of (say) lockdowns every two months. Unpleasant. But not fatal.
    Your last point was my point exactly. For that strategy to work, they have to sustain it for the duration, as there will be no herd immunity to protect them further down the line.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 6,814
    I thought the press conference today was measured, sensible and reassuring. Personally I think people aren’t giving the medical experts enough credit: they have a strategy and they are sticking to it. Of course it’s scary because we’ve never encountered anything like this in our lifetime. But I understand where they are coming from. In a society like the UK, telling everyone to pack up and sit in a house for weeks, months on end is just not going to work. When we do have the lockdown (and it’s coming) it needs to come when we’re worse off than we are today.

    That said, I do think if you have relatives who are immunocompromised, elderly or just not in a particularly good shape, I wouldn’t be blaze about the risks and if they can keep themselves away from other people, that’s a good thing for them to do.

  • TrèsDifficileTrèsDifficile Posts: 1,729
    I think Christine Lagarde might be an android. I heard her earlier call the virus “covid dash nineteen”
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,225
    IanB2 said:

    eadric said:

    I am deeply concerned by British complacency/deeply admiring of British phlegmatism.

    Are we making a tragic error, or have we divined a unique cure? We are alone in this course of action.

    One thing I know for sure, the BBC is talking shit: the News at Ten just categorically said "99% of people that get this will survive".

    This is utter bollocks. The fatality ratio is all over the place. In Wuhan it was nearer 4%. In Italy it's worse than THAT. The global resolved CFR has just gone up to 7%.

    1%?? Fuck off. We just don't know.

    1% max was the CMO’s best estimate this afternoon.
    Guesstimate.
    Eadric is right that it’s a roll of the dice.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    The Dow falling sharply again on the futures market
  • NEW THREAD

  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,570
    edited March 2020
    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.

    What is the reason for this?

    That was the strangest thing I heard. They were going for the South Korea model and then today just totally pivoted to the opposite extreme, without explaining any reason why they were no longer interesting in screening the public at large.
    That is another element which nudges me towards my conclusion of surrender to it.
    If you’re just letting rip, what’s the point in ramping up testing ?
    I think the logic is if the infection rate is as high as expected then mass testing is a waste of time.

    It is useful at the start of the pandemic to try and find who has it, and do contact testing for the positive.
    So they think SK approach is a waste of time? Even though they seem to be catching clusters of outbreaks and shutting them down?
    The South Korean approach seems to be working on the assumption that if we contain it then it'll all be fine, but all it needs is a further outbreak later on and they are fecked.
    No, that's not how it works. What they (and Japan etc) are doing is reducing the probability that in any given case, you give it to someone else. If the average sufferer passes it on to less than one person, the number of cases will decline, regardless of how many there are.
    That's if the methods can be sustained in the long term (months, not weeks).
    That's not true.

    Right now, the growth is say 25% more cases per day. So that means on average, each infected person infects someone every four days.

    A two week complete lockdown would mean that three cycles of this are missed (outside transmission in the home), and that a large number of people who were infectious cease being so.

    Of course, when restrictions are relaxed, the number of cases will flare up again. But that's the way this is managed. A series of (say) lockdowns every two months. Unpleasant. But not fatal.
    And you carry on doing that forever ( or until we get an effective vaccine). Because this is out there now. It is in Africa and India and all sorts of places where it will never be eliminated. So unless you are going to have permanent 2-3 week quarantine on every single person coming into your country for ever more, you are never going to be able to be free of it.

    That is why the only answer here is herd immunity. Because without that this is just going to keep on flaring up again every time a country relaxes the restrictions.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    edited March 2020



    Until they lift the lockdown at which point it all starts again.

    There is no lockdown. South Korea is not China. They cancelled events and they're working from home where practical, these things can be continued indefinitely.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,838
    eadric said:

    IanB2 said:

    eadric said:

    I am deeply concerned by British complacency/deeply admiring of British phlegmatism.

    Are we making a tragic error, or have we divined a unique cure? We are alone in this course of action.

    One thing I know for sure, the BBC is talking shit: the News at Ten just categorically said "99% of people that get this will survive".

    This is utter bollocks. The fatality ratio is all over the place. In Wuhan it was nearer 4%. In Italy it's worse than THAT. The global resolved CFR has just gone up to 7%.

    1%?? Fuck off. We just don't know.

    1% max was the CMO’s best estimate this afternoon.
    His estimate is contradicted by evidence elsewhere.

    If coronavirus crashes a health system, the CFR rockets. We have seen this in Wuhan, Iran and now Italy.
    Same question as to another poster. Why on earth should we take your estimate ahead of the CMOs? Special powers?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    Nigelb said:

    IanB2 said:

    eadric said:

    I am deeply concerned by British complacency/deeply admiring of British phlegmatism.

    Are we making a tragic error, or have we divined a unique cure? We are alone in this course of action.

    One thing I know for sure, the BBC is talking shit: the News at Ten just categorically said "99% of people that get this will survive".

    This is utter bollocks. The fatality ratio is all over the place. In Wuhan it was nearer 4%. In Italy it's worse than THAT. The global resolved CFR has just gone up to 7%.

    1%?? Fuck off. We just don't know.

    1% max was the CMO’s best estimate this afternoon.
    Guesstimate.
    Eadric is right that it’s a roll of the dice.
    It’s our experts best guess, and they have rather more data to hand than Twitter and an old book about the Black Death.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,695
    If anyone is looking for a good novel to read during a period of self-isolation I can thoroughly recommend Station Eleven by Emily St. John Mandel.

    I guarantee it will make you appreciate how lucky we are!
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    eadric said:

    Toilet paper not an issue in Waitrose tonight.

    Went in at 7pm and they had still about 50% stock on the shelves with three hours to go until close.

    But, lots of shelf stacking staff (looked like they'd mobilised more than usual) and both staff and customers looked nervous.

    A very large central London Sainsbury's was, this evening, all out of rice, pasta, many tinned goods, lots of cleaning products, and - oddly - almost all salt.
    The other Mr Rook reported more evidence of mass panic buying of bog roll at Tesco in Royston earlier today. The whole lot completely cleared out, along with nearly all the kitchen paper.

    Should be going there later on tomorrow afternoon myself, so will be interested to see which shelves the idiots have emptied by that point.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,720
    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.

    What is the reason for this?

    That was the strangest thing I heard. They were going for the South Korea model and then today just totally pivoted to the opposite extreme, without explaining any reason why they were no longer interesting in screening the public at large.
    That is another element which nudges me towards my conclusion of surrender to it.
    If you’re just letting rip, what’s the point in ramping up testing ?
    I think the logic is if the infection rate is as high as expected then mass testing is a waste of time.

    It is useful at the start of the pandemic to try and find who has it, and do contact testing for the positive.
    So they think SK approach is a waste of time? Even though they seem to be catching clusters of outbreaks and shutting them down?
    The South Korean approach seems to be working on the assumption that if we contain it then it'll all be fine, but all it needs is a further outbreak later on and they are fecked.
    No, that's not how it works. What they (and Japan etc) are doing is reducing the probability that in any given case, you give it to someone else. If the average sufferer passes it on to less than one person, the number of cases will decline, regardless of how many there are.
    That's if the methods can be sustained in the long term (months, not weeks).
    That's not true.

    Right now, the growth is say 25% more cases per day. So that means on average, each infected person infects someone every four days.

    A two week complete lockdown would mean that three cycles of this are missed (outside transmission in the home), and that a large number of people who were infectious cease being so.

    Of course, when restrictions are relaxed, the number of cases will flare up again. But that's the way this is managed. A series of (say) lockdowns every two months. Unpleasant. But not fatal.
    A 4 week lockdown is better, as nearly all infected patients will have either resolved or be identifiable, so can stay in quarantine. Those that would have been superspreaders are now safe. Serial lockdowns maybe needed for fresh hotspots.

    The question is whether that is better or worse than what the UK has planned. We will know next year.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    IanB2 said:

    eadric said:

    eadric said:

    Toilet paper not an issue in Waitrose tonight.

    Went in at 7pm and they had still about 50% stock on the shelves with three hours to go until close.

    But, lots of shelf stacking staff (looked like they'd mobilised more than usual) and both staff and customers looked nervous.

    A very large central London Sainsbury's was, this evening, all out of rice, pasta, many tinned goods, lots of cleaning products, and - oddly - almost all salt.
    Good grief man! What are you doing in a supermarket in central London? Don't you know there's a plague on?

    Get out to that bolt-hole in deepest Wales, or wherever it was, before it's too late.
    My wife is now refusing to flee. What can you do.
    Would you like me to tell her about the joys of Wales & the Welsh ?
    Given that virus was found on that Hong Kong dog, how can you be sure that our woolly friends aren’t carrying it around?
    But, is eadric planning to become a shepherd & live in some remote mountainside hut?

    I thought he was taking a house in the only affluent place in South Wales, the Vale of Glamorgan, where he could rub shoulders (but not shake hands) with the Welsh elite.

    I of course live -- in Gardenwalker's memorable phrase -- in a Valleys dunghill.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,225
    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.

    What is the reason for this?

    That was the strangest thing I heard. They were going for the South Korea model and then today just totally pivoted to the opposite extreme, without explaining any reason why they were no longer interesting in screening the public at large.
    That is another element which nudges me towards my conclusion of surrender to it.
    If you’re just letting rip, what’s the point in ramping up testing ?
    I think the logic is if the infection rate is as high as expected then mass testing is a waste of time.

    It is useful at the start of the pandemic to try and find who has it, and do contact testing for the positive.
    So they think SK approach is a waste of time? Even though they seem to be catching clusters of outbreaks and shutting them down?
    The South Korean approach seems to be working on the assumption that if we contain it then it'll all be fine, but all it needs is a further outbreak later on and they are fecked.
    No, that's not how it works. What they (and Japan etc) are doing is reducing the probability that in any given case, you give it to someone else. If the average sufferer passes it on to less than one person, the number of cases will decline, regardless of how many there are.
    That's if the methods can be sustained in the long term (months, not weeks).
    That's not true.

    Right now, the growth is say 25% more cases per day. So that means on average, each infected person infects someone every four days.

    A two week complete lockdown would mean that three cycles of this are missed (outside transmission in the home), and that a large number of people who were infectious cease being so.

    Of course, when restrictions are relaxed, the number of cases will flare up again. But that's the way this is managed. A series of (say) lockdowns every two months. Unpleasant. But not fatal.
    Your last point was my point exactly. For that strategy to work, they have to sustain it for the duration, as there will be no herd immunity to protect them further down the line.
    True; it’s a choice.
    Some societies have decided that its worth holding out in the hope of a vaccine next year.
    We’ve decided to go for herd immunity via infection.

    Who knows, we might even be right. But be very clear that it is a choice.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,570



    Until they lift the lockdown at which point it all starts again.

    There is no lockdown. South Korea is not China. They cancelled events and they're working from home where practical, these things can be continued indefinitely.
    Forever you mean.
  • CatManCatMan Posts: 3,060
    edited March 2020
    ***This thread has gone to the Australian GP***
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Foxy said:

    IanB2 said:

    So 10% off the DJ, now at 21,200 and 10.9% off the FTSE100, now at 5,237.

    How far will they fall over the coming weeks, I wonder?

    I was thinking DJ at 20,000 is a buy... but now I am not so sure.

    2013 to 2015, the Dow tracked about 18000. That looks like a credible bottom to me.

    But it depends on when, and how, the true crisis in America hits the news.
    I started buying again, late afternoon today. I think quite a lot of bargains about. Always tricky catching a falling knife, but I think there will be a shake out over the weekend and further drop on Monday. We may well then be close to the bottom.

    It provides some amusement, while awaiting our PPE, but I can't take it with me.
    Really?

    I hope I am wrong but I don't expect this to bottom out above 2008 levels. We are not even at the end of the beginning yet.
  • ChameleonChameleon Posts: 4,264



    Until they lift the lockdown at which point it all starts again.

    There is no lockdown. South Korea is not China. They cancelled events and they're working from home where practical, these things can be continued indefinitely.
    I wonder if we could do that for the 15 months it takes to manufacture a vaccine? Probably could.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.

    What is the reason for this?

    That was the strangest thing I heard. They were going for the South Korea model and then today just totally pivoted to the opposite extreme, without explaining any reason why they were no longer interesting in screening the public at large.
    That is another element which nudges me towards my conclusion of surrender to it.
    If you’re just letting rip, what’s the point in ramping up testing ?
    I think the logic is if the infection rate is as high as expected then mass testing is a waste of time.

    It is useful at the start of the pandemic to try and find who has it, and do contact testing for the positive.
    So they think SK approach is a waste of time? Even though they seem to be catching clusters of outbreaks and shutting them down?
    The South Korean approach seems to be working on the assumption that if we contain it then it'll all be fine, but all it needs is a further outbreak later on and they are fecked.
    No, that's not how it works. What they (and Japan etc) are doing is reducing the probability that in any given case, you give it to someone else. If the average sufferer passes it on to less than one person, the number of cases will decline, regardless of how many there are.
    That's if the methods can be sustained in the long term (months, not weeks).
    Why wouldn't they be able to be?
    People's behaviour will undoubtedly change, despite the official advice being the same. How would you feel after being locked down for four or five months?
    It's not a lockdown, doing it for four or five months would be fine, the internet is wonderful.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    Personally i’m a great believer in (British) exceptionalism. I can’t stand the argument that if everyone else is doing something different, you must be wrong. Invest in your own experts, robustly examine their judgement, and back them to come up with the right solutions. Learn from other countries, but don’t blindly follow them. And knowing that you will treat crises like that gives you better experts because they have no hiding place and therefore know their expertise has to be genuine.
  • Mikel Arteta tested positive and those around him have to self isolate

    Premiership about to be suspended ?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.

    What is the reason for this?

    That was the strangest thing I heard. They were going for the South Korea model and then today just totally pivoted to the opposite extreme, without explaining any reason why they were no longer interesting in screening the public at large.
    That is another element which nudges me towards my conclusion of surrender to it.
    If you’re just letting rip, what’s the point in ramping up testing ?
    I think the logic is if the infection rate is as high as expected then mass testing is a waste of time.

    It is useful at the start of the pandemic to try and find who has it, and do contact testing for the positive.
    So they think SK approach is a waste of time? Even though they seem to be catching clusters of outbreaks and shutting them down?
    The South Korean approach seems to be working on the assumption that if we contain it then it'll all be fine, but all it needs is a further outbreak later on and they are fecked.
    No, that's not how it works. What they (and Japan etc) are doing is reducing the probability that in any given case, you give it to someone else. If the average sufferer passes it on to less than one person, the number of cases will decline, regardless of how many there are.
    That's if the methods can be sustained in the long term (months, not weeks).
    Why wouldn't they be able to be?
    People's behaviour will undoubtedly change, despite the official advice being the same. How would you feel after being locked down for four or five months?
    It's not a lockdown, doing it for four or five months would be fine, the internet is wonderful.
    And after four or five months? Back to square one. Meanwhile countries that have herd immunity are moving on.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708



    Until they lift the lockdown at which point it all starts again.

    There is no lockdown. South Korea is not China. They cancelled events and they're working from home where practical, these things can be continued indefinitely.
    Forever you mean.
    No, until you have a vaccine, effective treatment or enough medical capacity to handle the peak.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,037

    eadric said:

    Toilet paper not an issue in Waitrose tonight.

    Went in at 7pm and they had still about 50% stock on the shelves with three hours to go until close.

    But, lots of shelf stacking staff (looked like they'd mobilised more than usual) and both staff and customers looked nervous.

    A very large central London Sainsbury's was, this evening, all out of rice, pasta, many tinned goods, lots of cleaning products, and - oddly - almost all salt.
    The other Mr Rook reported more evidence of mass panic buying of bog roll at Tesco in Royston earlier today. The whole lot completely cleared out, along with nearly all the kitchen paper.

    Should be going there later on tomorrow afternoon myself, so will be interested to see which shelves the idiots have emptied by that point.
    I wouldn't be using kitchen roll. If it doesn't take the skin off your arse it will block your waste pipe.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518



    Until they lift the lockdown at which point it all starts again.

    There is no lockdown. South Korea is not China. They cancelled events and they're working from home where practical, these things can be continued indefinitely.
    Forever you mean.
    No, until you have a vaccine, effective treatment or enough medical capacity to handle the peak.
    But the latter is precisely the objective of the British strategy. We don’t want the peak happening next winter.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518

    Mikel Arteta tested positive and those around him have to self isolate

    Premiership about to be suspended ?


    No, just the second successive Arsenal game.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,570



    Until they lift the lockdown at which point it all starts again.

    There is no lockdown. South Korea is not China. They cancelled events and they're working from home where practical, these things can be continued indefinitely.
    Forever you mean.
    No, until you have a vaccine, effective treatment or enough medical capacity to handle the peak.
    If you get a vaccine you mean.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486

    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Genuine question: a few days ago the government was going to have 10,000 tests a day. Now there are going to be none, other than for those in hospital.

    What is the reason for this?

    That was the strangest thing I heard. They were going for the South Korea model and then today just totally pivoted to the opposite extreme, without explaining any reason why they were no longer interesting in screening the public at large.
    That is another element which nudges me towards my conclusion of surrender to it.
    If you’re just letting rip, what’s the point in ramping up testing ?
    I think the logic is if the infection rate is as high as expected then mass testing is a waste of time.

    It is useful at the start of the pandemic to try and find who has it, and do contact testing for the positive.
    So they think SK approach is a waste of time? Even though they seem to be catching clusters of outbreaks and shutting them down?
    The South Korean approach seems to be working on the assumption that if we contain it then it'll all be fine, but all it needs is a further outbreak later on and they are fecked.
    No, that's not how it works. What they (and Japan etc) are doing is reducing the probability that in any given case, you give it to someone else. If the average sufferer passes it on to less than one person, the number of cases will decline, regardless of how many there are.
    Until they lift the lockdown at which point it all starts again.
    The virus only has a lifespan of about four days in most people (according to Prof Whitty). It triggers an immune reaction in minority of cases, which is what causes complications.

    What I don’t grasp is that, given the contagious period, why a lockdown wouldn’t have some lasting advantage. It would presumably cause it to fizzle out entirely in lots of places purely from being starved of new people to infect.
This discussion has been closed.